As AVB, Ancelotti and Di Matteo discovered, Chelsea make a drama out of a crisis... and even Jose may not survive a blank season

The absence of scrutiny for Manchester United under David Moyes has surprised Andre Villas-Boas.

‘For the champions of England to be sitting in their position, there has not been a lot of drama,’ he said. ‘I was involved in another club before and there was more drama surrounding my results than Manchester United’s.’

Indeed there was. Villas-Boas did not elaborate on the reasons but might believe he was the victim of mild prejudice. Moyes is an old-school British manager and paid his dues at Preston North End and Everton. Villas-Boas, by contrast, may feel he was seen as a young interloper at Chelsea, foreign, over-promoted and the beneficiary of an owner’s whim. He dared to take on the old guard in the dressing room, too, and got a few powerful backs up. Even so, it wasn’t the reason for the drama.

VIDEO Scroll down to watch Jose Mourinho: Schalke are difficult opponents for Chelsea

Down on his luck: Andre Villas-Boas implied his reign at Chelsea came under closer scrutiny than David Moyes' at Manchester United

Sitting pretty: David Moyes, pictured left with Phil Neville during the 0-0 draw in San Sebastian, will be given time at Manchester United

Villas-Boas certainly did not suffer discrimination because, after Chelsea, he quite quickly got another job in English football, with Tottenham Hotspur. If Moyes makes a mess of Manchester United, it is fair to assume he won’t be offered the helm at any other Champions League contender in a hurry.

So, if we rule out narrow-mindedness as the reason for the harsh analysis of Villas-Boas initially, what is left? It was his boss. Roman Abramovich directs the drama at Stamford Bridge, he creates the headlines. He has sold out AVB and plenty of others — but this season brings the chance to write a new narrative.

Moyes has escaped the most negative scrutiny this season because, frankly, there would be no point to it. Speculation has to go somewhere for it to be valid. It is worthless deliberating on the identity of the next Prime Minister the day after a General Election, for instance, because the winner is likely to be five years away from any public reckoning. Equally, Moyes sidestepped the worst of it because he signed a six-year contract and Manchester United are not a sacking club. Even if he fails to make the top four he will be given next season and probably one more to get it right.

Villas-Boas, meanwhile, was manager of Chelsea, a club that sacked one manager — Roberto Di Matteo — 20 games after winning the Champions League. There will always be drama around Chelsea until Abramovich changes his approach. This season is all about him, not his latest put-upon manager.

Pressure to perform: Carlo Ancelotti (left) was sacked after his second season at Chelsea, despite winning the Double in his first. Meanwhile, interim boss Roberto Di Matteo won the Champions League and was given the boot six months later

Revolving door policy: Roman Abramovich has had a pragmatic approach to appointing managers at Chelsea

Jose Mourinho may be a mighty name in
world football but at Stamford Bridge he is just another coach. We’ve
seen them come, we’ve seen them go. They win the league, or the
Champions League, or they get fired. Sometimes they win and quickly
leave anyway. And that explains the drama.

When
it didn’t go well for Villas-Boas it was a plain fact that he was under
pressure; just as, if Moyes stumbles, it is known United will keep the
faith.

Mourinho lost at
Newcastle United on Saturday, which may be a blip or an early sign that
Chelsea will come up short. The manager insists this is now a long-term
project with objectives beyond the immediacy of another trophy and he
has time to build a title-winning team, but we shall see.

Most
observers require fresh evidence because little in Chelsea’s history
under Abramovich indicates Mourinho, or any manager, can survive a blank
season.

The irony is
that, if Abramovich still harbours fantasies of attracting Pep
Guardiola, only by giving his nemesis Mourinho room to fail can he prove
that Chelsea offer more than the thrill of a whirlwind romance. It is
up to the owner to prove the sceptics wrong in the event of a slow start
or a near miss.Defeat is all
about how a team react, but at Chelsea it is about the owner, too. As
Villas-Boas discovered, Chelsea’s specialty has been making a drama out
of a crisis: Mourinho says no longer, but his employment status at the
end of the season should reveal the truth.

Chastening defeat: Jose Mourinho can only watch as Chelsea slumped to an unexpected 2-0 defeat on Tyneside

In focus: Will Pep Guardiola, who has masterminded a sensational start to his tenure at Bayern Munich, eventually be wooed by Chelsea?

Nice lunch ... shame about those results, Sven!

‘A journey to the heart of two great footballing cultures’ is how the publishers described The Italian Job, the 2007 book by Gianluca Vialli and Gabriele Marcotti. In an attempt to understand the differences between the game as played in England and Italy, the pair spoke to an impressive variety of sources. Sir Alex Ferguson, Arsene Wenger, Fabio Capello and Jose Mourinho contributed. As did Sven Goran Eriksson.

Ferguson talked engagingly for hours, Marcotti recalled. Wenger gave up an entire afternoon and then chased the authors across the car park as they were leaving to offer additional insight.

A chapter could have been filled just with Mourinho’s analysis and admiration of Didier Drogba. And then there was Sven. He was polite, charming, helpful, all the attributes that make him such a popular individual, but became most animated only when talking of football’s rewards, not its essence. He would grow very excited if recommending or exchanging the names of good restaurants, hotels or holiday destinations; then the subject would return to the game and he would become quieter, less engaged.

Mr Consistent: Sven Goran Eriksson led England to the quarter-finals in Japan and Korea, losing to 10-man Brazil

Smooth operator: Eriksson also steered England to the last eight in Euro 2004 (left) and the 2006 World Cup

Heavens above: Eriksson and his players ponder a penalty defeat to Portugal in Gelsenkirchen

His lurid memoirs, now released, would be comical had English football not spent close to £5million annually facilitating his playboy lifestyle, at the expense of worthwhile development. Eriksson only looks impressive because, immediately after his tenure, Steve McClaren failed to take England to the 2008 European Championship finals.

Yet as Fabio Capello and Roy Hodgson have proved subsequently, McClaren was an exception, not the rule.

Only now, with the publication of Eriksson’s autobiography, are many realising why he preferred to play tour guide rather than football manager. It is full of examples of Eriksson’s disconnection. The national coach has so little time with his players that he can only use them in their club positions, he insists. This will have come as a surprise to England squad members under Terry Venables or Glenn Hoddle who were required to play wide midfield or wing back, full back or wide centre half, as occasion demanded. Marcel Desailly, Gilberto Silva, Philipp Lahm, even Zinedine Zidane and Lionel Messi, have also played in roles that were at odds with their club berth.

The adaptability of the performer is clearly important, but so too is the willingness of the manager to coach.

When the difficulties of pairing Frank Lampard and Steven Gerrard first became apparent it was suggested that Eriksson should make one the designated holding midfield player, and leave the other the freedom to push forward.

His response was typical. ‘They can both play holding midfield,’ he said, ‘but it is a question in their heads. Do they like to do it? Are they prepared to do it? We have never talked about it.’

A pity they didn’t offer to resolve it over lunch, really. The one thing we can be certain of is that Sven would have known somewhere nice.

And while we're at it

In heat of battle, Fer firesblanks

If Leroy Fer is as keen on winning football matches as he suggests, Saturday would be a good time to start.

Chris Hughton, his manager at Norwich, probably has one lousy performance left in him. If it comes against West Ham United this weekend, he may well be gone. Norwich were fined £20,000 by the Football Association for failing to control their players during a match with Cardiff City on October 26. The charge relates directly to the aftermath of an incident involving Fer.

When Norwich team-mate Alex Tettey went down injured in the fourth minute of added time, Cardiff goalkeeper David Marshall sent the ball into touch so he could receive treatment. The plan was for Norwich to return it to their opponents as repayment for good sportsmanship, except Fer chose to kick the ball directly into the unguarded net instead.

His action caused a small riot and would have won the game for Norwich had referee Mike Jones not intervened and concocted a bogus excuse to erase the goal. He put his own position in jeopardy by doing so.

Fer then went on television and played the uber-professional. Yes, it was deliberate, he announced. He was trying to win the game. In Europe, the match simply continues once the player has been treated. He saw nothing wrong in his actions. Fer spoke with conceit, as if his instincts were somehow superior to those of others. He was a winner, he seemed to say. He made no apologies for that.

Yet, in similar circumstances, play does not progress this way on the continent. Only if a team kick the ball out to allow their own player to be treated is it not returned.

Still, with Norwich in such dire straits, it must be good to know they have an at-all-costs winner like Fer on their side. So how many league goals has he scored with his ferocious approach this season, when all 21 players have been at it? None.

Putting the boot in: Fer clashes with Manchester City's David Silva at the Etihad

He doesn’t seem to be creating too much, either, as the three strikers Norwich signed for £13.5m — Ricky van Wolfswinkel, Gary Hooper and Johan Elmander — have managed just six shots on target between them and scored once. And last week, Manchester City put seven past Norwich unopposed. If Fer had fancied demonstrating that well-honed determination to win, this would surely have been the time. Just one at the City end to stop the rot? Apparently not.

So far, Fer has proved he has a dead eye for goal only when the opposition has stopped and the goalkeeper has wandered off towards the corner flag. He has the kind of competitive streak that every manager desires — but only if he is looking for a pay-off.

No 1: Roy Hodgson has shown unfailing faith in Joe Hart

It has been suggested that Roy Hodgson may start Joe Hart again in the friendly matches against Chile and Germany, to show he has faith in him.

This would be unnecessary. Hodgson’s loyalty is shown in the number of times he has picked Hart during his tenure as England manager: every competitive game, plus all friendlies bar two. He has nothing to prove. Even if Hart stays second choice at Manchester City, he is likely to remain Hodgson’s No 1.

Hart must, however, have a confident and experienced deputy in case of injury or further misfortune. The essentiality of grooming an alternative is more pressing than any need to give Hodgson’s chosen one another cuddle.

In 1991, England reached the final of Rugby’s World Cup at Twickenham. They beat France convincingly in Paris in the quarter-finals and Scotland at Murrayfield in the last four.

They did not play the most exciting game, but it got the job done. And Australia’s outspoken David Campese kept chipping away.

‘I wouldn’t play for England even if you paid me,’ he said, after the Scotland win. ‘Playing that sort of boring stuff is a good way to destroy the image of the game. They are all so scared of losing, they won’t try anything.’

On top of the world: Australia celebrate victory at Twickenham

Mind games: David Campese lifts the Webb-Ellis trophy

Campese’s relentless criticism appeared to get through. Coach Geoff Cooke abandoned the forward-dominated game plan for the final and implemented a more expansive style.

Australia won 12-6. ‘If England had actually played 10-man rugby, they probably would’ve beaten us,’ Campese mocked in the aftermath.

Over time, the supposed influence of Campese’s taunts has grown with retelling.

Certainly, Wallabies coach Bob Dwyer is sceptical that Campese alone got under England’s skin. He believes Australia’s 40-15 victory over England in Sydney the previous summer changed Cooke’s tactical plan more than any chirping by the critics.

The fact remains, though, that many of Australia’s sportsmen are keen on inflicting mental disintegration — and Shane Warne was part of a cricket team that thrived on it.

Playing it with a straight bat: Alastair Cook refused to be drawn on Warne's criticisms

So his criticism of Alastair Cook, England’s captain, as cautious and unimaginative should be taken with a pinch of salt. Warne knows a tendency to conservatism is a seam to be picked at this winter, and his greatest victory would be persuading Cook and England to take unnecessary risks in the forthcoming Ashes series.

For if they keep their heads and play to their strengths, there is only one winner. Again.